What is really discouraging about this rally is the terminology. Some say terminology doesn't make or break a movement like this, but shouldn't it? Using dated terms like "occupy" have a very military and even colonizing meaning and history behind them.
I was recently at Ryerson University for a talk about Reflecting on Indigenous Resistance. The very conversation about Occupy Toronto's (and Occupy Wall Street) terminology was discussed.
Ultimately, in a social movement- especially one that is attesting to speak for the 99% of the population that is not enjoying vast riches- the organizers should have a better grasp of history, and the power of words.
Perhaps the rally be re-named "Re-Occupy" Toronto. The city is already occupied. The land is already occupied by not only the 1%, but recognition should be paid to the Indigenous people who have lived on the land Toronto now sits on, before the metropolis was ever imagined.
Conversely, flashy and sensational wording is key for grabbing attention, so maybe we should give the organizers the benefit of the doubt and assume they knew how poorly imagined their slogan was. Or maybe we don't and we simply view their cause as something ill prepared, ill conceived.
It will be interesting to see if the participants succeed at occupying Toronto, or Wall street for that matter. Won't that make them the colonizers?
No comments:
Post a Comment